Um, yeah. Just this morning I was trying to fix up
something involving
insect mouth parts, and in clicking on "Labium", I was treated to a
full color photo of female genitalia, up close and personal. There are
a lot of booby-trapped links like that; one wonders how many
ordinarily innocent phrases lead to similar surprises because the
sexual fetish community-- and therefore Wikipedia-- has co-opted the
phrase.
On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 10:26 PM, Steve Bennett <stevagewp(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 2/22/08, Oskar Sigvardsson
<oskarsigvardsson(a)gmail.com> wrote:
I'm sorry, but what sets this category apart
from any other, say for
instance [[Category:Dogs in clothing]] (at
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Dogs_in_clothing ). Commons
Here are some things:
- It's NSFW. I accidentally clicked on "masturbating amy" at work,
thinking it couldn't possibly be...
- It's not safe for kids. Apparently some libraries already ban
wikipedia. Making institutions unwilling to use our resource is not
helping spread knowledge.
- I would happily reorganise a "dogs in clothing" category while my
girlfirend was watching.
- It's bad for our reputation to be known as a source of pornography.
It's not bad for our reputation to be known as a source of dogs in
clothing photos.
is simply a collection of free media
representing different aspects of
human life. And not to get on a high horse or anything, but there is
absolutely nothing shameful about female masturbation. It's a
perfectly healthy part of human life, it should be encouraged, and
information about it should be distributed as widely as possible.
Yes, you are introducing a moral argument which is probably best kept
out. There's obviously nothing wrong having photos of "shameful"
topics (think of political events, massacres etc).
In addition, three of the images are fine works
of art (the Klimt one
is spectacular and the Japanese one is mezmerizing) and another one is
fascinating illustration, a true picture of its time.
I think the illustrations - particularly historical - are ok. They
probably pass the tests listed above.
Frankly, I find your position prudish and
counter-productive with
respect for what we are trying to achieve. We shouldn't censor based
on morality.
Heh, it's not often I get called prudish. I'm not quite sure what you
mean by "censoring based on morality", because I don't think I'm
proposing censoring, and I'm not bringing morality into anything. I'm
suggesting that storing and making available porn is not good for our
mission.
Steve
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: